KAMLESH KODULAL TRIPATHI,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 4(3), NAGPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 357/NAG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 June 2026AY 2016-174 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that while notices were sent via email, the assessee had requested that notices not be communicated through email. Therefore, the appeals were allowed for statistical purposes, and the matters were restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were against assessment orders passed under Section 147. The primary contention was that the appellate orders were passed without providing an opportunity for a hearing. The assessee also claimed the bank accounts in question did not belong to them.

What were the issues?

Whether the appellate orders were passed without providing a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee, and the validity of notices sent via email when physical notice was requested.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH :: NAGPUR

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI KHETTRA MOHAN ROY

For Appellant: Shri Rachit Thakar, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar, CIT-DR
Hearing: 09.06.2026Pronounced: 09.06.2026

PER BENCH:

These appeals filed by the same assessee are directed against the separate orders of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (for short, “CIT(A)”), all dated 08/04/2025, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”) which are emanating from the different

ITA Nos. 356-358/NAG/20245 (Kamlesh Kodulal Tripathi) assessment orders all dated 23.03.2022 passed u/s. 147 of the Act by the ITO, Ward-4(3), Nagpur for the Assessment Years (AYs) 2014-15, 2016-17 & 2017-18 respectively.

2.

These appeals were heard together, as involved common question of law and fact wherein learned counsel for the assessee pointed out ground No.1 that impugned orders have been passed by the NFAC without giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

3.

Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), though, relied on the impugned orders, we find from the records of NFAC that notices being issued via email provided in the ITBA portal which were successfully delivered to the assessee, but learned counsel for the assessee has submitted that notices were not issued to the assessee physically. In this regard, we find that in Form No. 35, though, email ID has been provided but assessee mentions that notices be not communicated through email.

ITA Nos. 356-358/NAG/20245 (Kamlesh Kodulal Tripathi) 4. Thus, in the facts and circumstances as the assessment was completed u/s. 147 wherein too, assessee had failed to justify the source of deposits in the bank account, while learned counsel submits that bank accounts are not of assessee. The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. The matters are restored to the file of the Ld. AO for denovo adjudication on merits as well as on legal issues. The Ld. AO shall grant the assessee an adequate opportunity of being heard and thereafter pass a fresh order in accordance with law.

5.

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in open Court on 09.06.2026

sd/- sd/- ANUBHAV SHARMA KHETTRA MOHAN ROY JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Nagpur: Dated: 09/06/2026 vr/-

ITA Nos. 356-358/NAG/20245 (Kamlesh Kodulal Tripathi) Copy to: 1. The Assessee 2. The Revenue 3. The Pr.CIT concerned. 4. The DR, ITAT, Nagpur 5. Guard file. By order Vukkem Digitally signed by Vukkem Rambabu Rambabu Date: 2026.06.09 18:00:06 +05'30' Senior Private Secretary ITAT, Nagpur

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →